Opinion Manifestos galore
Delhi-based Hindustan Express,in its editorial entitled waadey hein,waadon ka kya (these are promises,what of promises?) on April 10 says...
Delhi-based Hindustan Express,in its editorial entitled waadey hein,waadon ka kya (these are promises,what of promises?) on April 10 says: Looking at the manifestos issued by the big political parties,it is clear that they have played a joke on the people. The promise to supply wheat or rice at Rs 2 or 3 a kilogram is not easy to fulfil and even if it is fulfilled,what would the BJP or Congress lose in the process? The loss would be to the states exchequer. Many parties would have to come together to form the government. If these parties are issuing their separate manifestos,it is clear that they are deliberately fooling the people. The paper has also pointed to the need for a mechanism which could monitor these manifestos and make the parties accountable for their promises after they assume power.
Commenting on the BJP manifesto,Hyderabad-based Rahnuma-e-Deccan in its editorial (April 5) says that BJP has once again adopted a communal and divisive agenda. The party is again trying to use the Ram temple issue that gave them the taste of power for the first time. The paper asks if one can trust the sweet talk for minorities by a party that considers Muslims as enemy number one and severely opposes reservation for Muslims for education and employment and implementation of Sachar Committees recommendations.
Hindustan Express in its editorial on March 26 writes: The steps (for Muslims) promised by the Congress in its manifesto will undoubtedly be considered bold and revolutionary. But it would be necessary that the party comes to power and implements these promises. It is the perception of the common people that small relief is certainly provided to the Muslims but if some big and courageous step is needed,what is given are commissions,committees and reports and these too are put in cold storage.
In the context of the declarations of the Third Front,Jamaat-e-Islamis Daawat,in a commentary on April 7,writes: The people of the country are not in a mood to usher the UPA into power with a clear majority,against the NDA. The people of this country have seen the face of pride and hardheadedness of the Congress with a clear majority. And,a weak government has proved to be much better than a stable government in this country where there are diverse cultures,religions and classes. With the emergence of the Third Front,it is certain that UPA would find it hard to form a government without its support. And,then,the Congress would be able to get rid of the extremely abominable hegemony of America and Israel; will use caution while raising the slogan of Islamic terrorism; will not close its eyes to Hindu terrorism; and will not leave the police free to perpetrate unchecked oppression like in the case of Batla House and remain untouched by any sort of an inquiry.
Bearding a controversy?
For a while,the issue of whether a beard is a religious tenet of Islam or not,has been the subject of discussion. But what has recently complicated matters has been a remark made by the Supreme Court judge,Justice Markandey Katju,during the hearing of a petition by a Muslim student of a Christian school in Madhya Pradesh,asserting his right to keep a beard. Justice Katju is reported to have linked the keeping of beard and even wearing of burqa by Muslim women with Talibanisation.
In view of the heat generated by Justice Katjus reported remark,Member of the Law Commission of India,Prof. Tahir Mahmood (according to a report in Rashtriya Sahara,April 6),met Justice Katju who expressed his sorrow at the use of objectionable words.
According to a statement released by Prof. Mahmood,the President of All India Muslim Personal Law Board,Maulana Rabey Hasani Nadwi,in a telephonic conversation,congratulated Mehmood for meeting the judge and emphasised the need for a clarification from him. In his statement Tahir Mahmood said that in view of the position of the AIMPLB chief there should be an end to the continuing condemnation of Justice Katju by different religious organisations and leaders.
But,then,according to a front page report in Hindustan Express (April 9),the secretary of AIMPLB,Maulana Syed Mohammad Wali Rahmani,claimed that Justice Katju had not given any clarification nor denied having made any objectionable remark and he had only stated that what he said was not understood correctly. And,the controversy persists.
Compiled by Seema Chishti
Share
